If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

although I suppose it would be fair to analyze who else was on the floor with Mike. Being there with Granger and hibbert can make a huge difference

How does that even come close to ending the discussion? These stats don't take into consideration everyone, only Dunleavy. A proper comparison would be to judge the starters with Dunleavy and the starters without George.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I'm dying to see any sort of statistics supporting your side of the argument. So far, all I've seen from you guys is, "No, his defense sucks. No, that's not right. No, those stats are skewed." Give us something else then. count has given you some stats, the fact that Manu "tore Dunleavy apart" was broken down by cordobes...I mean, what do you guys have here?

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I'm dying to see any sort of statistics supporting your side of the argument. So far, all I've seen from you guys is, "No, his defense sucks. No, that's not right. No, those stats are skewed." Give us something else then. count has given you some stats, the fact that Manu "tore Dunleavy apart" was broken down by cordobes...I mean, what do you guys have here?

he plays with the starters of course the offense is great when the starters are in there and they are down when the bench comes in. I would like to see the differcnce when Brush is starting. I like Mike but i think he would help us when more games as the primary scorer on the 2nd unit doesnt that make sense to you??

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I'm dying to see any sort of statistics supporting your side of the argument. So far, all I've seen from you guys is, "No, his defense sucks. No, that's not right. No, those stats are skewed." Give us something else then. count has given you some stats, the fact that Manu "tore Dunleavy apart" was broken down by cordobes...I mean, what do you guys have here?

I keep seeing a lot of "you guys" getting thrown around but nobody is really making an effort to refute my arguments. I appreciate Count digging up some stats on the subject but they don't really prove anything except that we are (not surprisingly) better with the starters playing than the backups.

"As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

he plays with the starters of course the offense is great when the starters are in there and they are down when the bench comes in. I would like to see the differcnce when Brush is starting. I like Mike but i think he would help us when more games as the primary scorer on the 2nd unit doesnt that make sense to you??

I understand that, but you guys haven't given any evidence to support your argument.

At first I thought Dunleavy would be better with the second unit, but that was mainly because the second unit was so pathetic. Now that Obie has started playing Tyler and usually one starter with the second unit, it's not that bad. TJ has been an asset as well so far off the bench, although I remain skeptical that he keeps that up. For now, I like him with the starters. They have played well and seem to have good chemistry. I'd like for us to see that through before Obie goes off switching things up.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I keep seeing a lot of "you guys" getting thrown around but nobody is really making an effort to refute my arguments. I appreciate Count digging up some stats on the subject but they don't really prove anything except that we are (not surprisingly) better with the starters playing than the backups.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I'm dying to see any sort of statistics supporting your side of the argument. So far, all I've seen from you guys is, "No, his defense sucks. No, that's not right. No, those stats are skewed." Give us something else then. count has given you some stats, the fact that Manu "tore Dunleavy apart" was broken down by cordobes...I mean, what do you guys have here?

Haven't we learn that numbers don't tell everything? are you telling me that Troy Murphy was an all star Power Forward because he was a double double machine?(stats) so his defense was not as bad because the starting team scored more than the bench and didn't allow as many points as the bench? OMG why did we trade him then?

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I understand that, but you guys haven't given any evidence to support your argument.

At first I thought Dunleavy would be better with the second unit, but that was mainly because the second unit was so pathetic. Now that Obie has started playing Tyler and usually one starter with the second unit, it's not that bad. TJ has been an asset as well so far off the bench, although I remain skeptical that he keeps that up. For now, I like him with the starters. They have played well and seem to have good chemistry. I'd like for us to see that through before Obie goes off switching things up.

Brush hasnt played with the starters yet so we dont have thoes stats and stats dont tell everything. I would just like Brush because i feel like we are lackying defense on the premiter. We arent benching granger lol so mike would be the only other option. I just dont know who will guard Kobe when we play LA Danny or mike?? that scares me

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

What does defense have to do with the comment?????????????
I think it is very weird that multiple "in defense of Mike Dunleavy" threads are being created when he has pretty obviously been the worst of all the players getting big minutes through the first three games.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

What does defense have to do with the comment?????????????
I think it is very weird that multiple "in defense of Mike Dunleavy" threads are being created when he has pretty obviously been the worst of all the players getting big minutes through the first three games.

some one said mike was good at defense last game because he got 16 and 9 last game

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I'm not a stat guy. I don't know if the stats you are asking for even exist. Rush hasn't played yet this season and Dunleavy has pretty much only played with the other starters. We would need stats that show how the rest of the starters perform without Dunleavy.

Of course, whatever tiny sample space that might exist there probably includes Paul George, a rookie who makes a lot of rookie mistakes, so probably skewed.

I will say I don't trust last years stats because I think this team's offensive issues went a lot deeper than lack of Mike. Hurt Granger, a backcourt that provided very little scoring (Watson/Rush is kind of brutal) and an underutilized Hibbert for one thing.

I can't give you stats, sound logic is the best I have to offer.

"As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I understand that, but you guys haven't given any evidence to support your argument.

At first I thought Dunleavy would be better with the second unit, but that was mainly because the second unit was so pathetic. Now that Obie has started playing Tyler and usually one starter with the second unit, it's not that bad. TJ has been an asset as well so far off the bench, although I remain skeptical that he keeps that up. For now, I like him with the starters. They have played well and seem to have good chemistry. I'd like for us to see that through before Obie goes off switching things up.

Keep in mind, I'm not for immediately sticking Rush back into the starting lineup the second hes available. He is going to have to earn his way back. I just think longterm it makes the most sense. I think its important for Granger to play next to a strong wing defender... and I'm not ready to give all the credit to Mike Dunleavy for the success of the offense. Darren Collison, Roy Hibbert, and even Josh Mcroberts (a pretty effective glue guy himself) get some of that credit. Oh yeah and that Granger kid can score too

"As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

What does defense have to do with the comment?????????????
I think it is very weird that multiple "in defense of Mike Dunleavy" threads are being created when he has pretty obviously been the worst of all the players getting big minutes through the first three games.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I dunno. The idea of a 3 wing rotation of Granger/George/Rush with Danny ultimately being the worst defender of the 3 sounds incredibly intriquing from a defensive point of view. Offensively it doesnt look to shabby either.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to cinotimz For This Useful Post:

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

So many arguments to make here, not enough time.

Mike's ability to move without the ball is important this season. Last season it was meaningless, but this season we need players to cut when Hibbert has the ball. Mike has the clear advantage over Brandon here.

However, our main problem right now is bench offense. We sorely need it, and Dunleavy is the best facilitator for that. Rush isn't going to do it, and the players coming off the bench now surely aren't doing it.

Also, our two biggest weaknesses in the starting lineup are Collison's and Dunleavy's defense. You solve two big problems, imo, by moving Dunleavy to the bench. Also, two seasons ago, Brandon did a great job with Hibbert off the give & go. We didn't see it last year because we didn't initiate offense through Hibbert, but I think people will be surprised with Brandon in the starting lineup. He'll get 2-3 baskets/game off of cuts, which will also like raise his FT attempts. I hope he gets the chance.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

Also, two seasons ago, Brandon did a great job with Hibbert off the give & go. We didn't see it last year because we didn't initiate offense through Hibbert, but I think people will be surprised with Brandon in the starting lineup. He'll get 2-3 baskets/game off of cuts, which will also like raise his FT attempts. I hope he gets the chance.

You know I kinda forgot about this but I remember what you are talking about. Rush and Hibbert played off each other really well in their rookie year. Brandon may surprise some of his detractors if he gets the chance. Hes got more BBall IQ than hes getting credit for.

"As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

I keep seeing a lot of "you guys" getting thrown around but nobody is really making an effort to refute my arguments. I appreciate Count digging up some stats on the subject but they don't really prove anything except that we are (not surprisingly) better with the starters playing than the backups.

First off, my apologies for abandoning this debate for some time. Ironically I had to leave to play in my basketball league night games. Then once I returned home I was required to spend time with my wife, even though I tried to convince her that there were so many people who were "wrong" on the internet.

Next, I will say that "you guys" is being used by those attempting to maintain civility rather than calling out individuals. Certain posters have decided to post their elementary thoughts in a brash way and have shown not to be able to voice their thoughts in an arena of ideas. Its both sad and embarrassing for them. I would like to thank you for providing sound/rational counter points based in reason and opinion.

Let it never be said that I don't appreciate an intelligent opposing view point. Nevertheless, I've read all of your posts and you seem to agree about certain aspects but believe that Dunleavy's increased offensive productivity would be better suited in the second unit.

I see where you're coming from, but I think we would be asking Mike to play a much different style than he is playing in the starting unit. Placed in that 2nd lineup, Mike would be looked upon as perhaps the first scoring option. Therefore he would need to look for his own shot often. IMO, this is not when he is at his best. Mike is not particularly gifted at creating his own shot. However, a player like Hansbrough who is used to putting up a high volume of shots IS better suited in the 2nd unit. Allowing Josh, like Mike, to play complimentary roles to the other weapons in the 1st unit. Ideally the 2nd unit would have a similar structure to the starters, a combination of score first players and complimentary players.

When he is with the starters, individual scoring is not necessarily a requirement. Mike helps open things up for the others. Now if Brandon would move, pass, and draw fouls like Mike then no contest Brandon is the winner. But I suffered watching him all of last season, he just didn't do it. He is maddening cause he will on a rare occasion. It comes out of nowhere and you're saying to yourself, "by God I think he's got." But then after he'd miss the free throw for his And 1 opportunity, right back to the baseline 3 he would stand.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

In 105 minutes with Dunleavy on the court, the Pacers have scored 252 points in 214 possessions, or 117.8 per 100. In the 39 minutes he's been off the floor, the Pacers have scored 60 points in 74 possessions or 81.1 per 100.

On the court - Pacers allowed 231 points in 218 possessions, or 106.0 per 100.

Off the court - Pacers allowed 78 points in 71 possessions, or 109.9 per 100.

Wow. I'm not a huge "stats" guy. And I by no means think this is the end all be all for proof validating my beliefs. Still this is pretty impressive. And while of course Mike has been with the starters he has played some extended periods with the backups. Normally Danny is the first to come out, replaced by George. Mike and PG finish out the first and start the 2nd. Then Danny returns for Mike at about the 10 to 9 minute mark in the 2nd.

Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

Wow, long debate.

First I want to start out with saying that I like Dun, and I like what he brings to the team. I'd like to keep him if he wanted to be a fourth wing and sign a cheap deal. (Just like I'd like to keep Dahntay so long as he's cool with not playing :P) But ideally, Brandon should start, imo. However, I've complained enough on here about players not earning their minutes, so Brandon needs to beat Dun out for the starters job. (because we all know, that Brandon is capable of playing worse.) And also, if the team continues to play well, I do think it's better to keep the chemistry the same..instead of mixing things up for no reason. Stability is important on a basketball team.

First, Dun's a poor defender. He is. He knows what he's supposed to do in terms of team defense, and he takes charges, but a majority of the time he isn't that effective there either. (as opposed to George, who just seems to have no clue in what he's supposed to do )

This is exemplified even more, with the fact that Collison is the worst defender out of the three point guards. He has the capabilities of being a good defender and needs to be taught (much like George, because both are willing) but right now, we have the worst PG/SG combo, in terms of defense, on the team.

Next, we don't need Dun's offense in the starting lineup and we do need it off the bench.

This is two fold. One, I've read that JOB (not a criticism) wants to make sure Dun gets his shots in the game. However, Dun is less effective at scoring the basketball than Darren, Hibbert, and Granger. It will continue to be tough to give Dun his shots, and quite frankly, I don't really want him to get them if Darren, Roy, or Danny can score instead.

He brings passing, cutting, and awareness to the starting lineup, but the rest of the starters do as well. Brandon brings defense, which is something..that isn't brought as much to the starting lineup. (Although, it is better than last season.)

However, the bench, desperatly needs scoring. Dun would be the first option off the bench.

But even more necessary, is the fact that the bench needs better ball movement and awareness. TJ stalls the offense, having Dun there to counteract that would be a good thing. (And when AJ plays, Dun and Price seem to play well together, which..it's good to have chemistry on the bench) Tyler, bless him (and I adore Tyler), is also a bit of a black hole. The bench rotation isn't currently filled with many (or any) good passers. Dun would help immensly.

Having a good bench rotation, when the Pacers are playing at such a fast pace, is important, and adding Dun to the bench, benifits the bench much more than adding Brandon to it.

And finally, I believe Dun has an endurance issues.
I noticed last game that Dun was spending a lot of his energy on defense, and I think it's possible that the energy spent caused him to miss a lot of his shots. He also is "notoriously bad" in the fourth quarter. This is just somethig I've observed, I don't have anything statistically to back it up.

So I think letting him play off the bench, in shorter time, would help him be more effective, imo. I think it would also allow him to be a better defender, as he could "go all out" and not have to worry about getting tired.

So basically, I think it'd be better for the team if Brandon earned the starting spot. And I think it would actually be better for Dun if he was playing from the bench.